An Explanatory Model of Jury Verdicts in Medical MalpracticeCases

提高对纠纷转化和民事诉讼的认识 诉讼制度比较普遍，系统研究民事陪审制度 需要判决。 对民事司法制度的许多批评是 基于对陪审团模式的性质和原因的假设 判决，特别是特定类型案件的判决金额 例如医疗事故案件和产品责任案件。 通过 从横向和纵向两个方面设计和评价一个 使用ll州48个县数据的多元生态模型 20世纪80年代初，安德鲁斯和丹尼尔斯博士的实证研究发展了 对医疗事故实际结果模式的解释 陪审团案件通过汇总分析的裁决。 他们的 有助于理解陪审团做出什么决定以及为什么做出决定 陪审团的裁决比陪审团案件的数量更重要，因为陪审团的裁决是 在决定大多数民事案件的结果方面非常有影响力 通过非正式程序处理的诉讼。

To enhance our understanding of dispute transformation and the civil litigation system more generally, systematic study of civil jury verdicts is needed. Much criticism of the civil justice system is based on presumptions about the nature and causes of patterns of jury verdicts, especially the sizes of awards in particular types of cases such as medical malpractice cases and products liability cases. By devising and evaluating, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, a multivariate ecological model using data from 48 counties in ll states for the early 1980s, Drs. Andrews and Daniels' empirical study develops an explanation of patterns of actual outcomes in medical malpractice jury cases through the aggregate analysis of awards. Their contribution to understanding what decisions are made by juries and why is important beyond the numbers of jury cases because jury verdicts are very influential in determining the outcomes of the majority of civil lawsuits handled through more informal processes.